Why Is the IETF Trust Requiring “All Rights Reserved” When That Term Has Been Superfluous for Over 25 Years?

Executive Summary The phrase “All Rights Reserved” originated as a formal requirement under the 1910 Buenos Aires Convention, which conditioned copyright protection on an explicit reservation of rights. However, this requirement became obsolete once all Buenos Aires Convention parties acceded to the Berne Convention, whose Article 5(2) prohibits conditioning copyright on formalities. As a result, the phrase no longer serves a necessary legal function in modern copyright regimes. Its continued inclusion in IETF Trust copyright notices appears to be a historical artifact rather than a functional requirement. This document examines whether the phrase provides any present legal or operational value in IETF documents and considers whether its continued use should be reconsidered.

Introduction The phrase “All Rights Reserved” was commonly used to satisfy Article 3 of the 1910 Buenos Aires Convention (BAC), which required that a work contain a statement indicating reservation of rights in order to receive protection in other Convention states. The phrase was therefore historically required in the inter-American copyright system, particularly before the United States and all Buenos Aires Convention parties were covered by broader formality-free copyright regimes. That function became effectively obsolete no later than August 23, 2000, when Nicaragua, apparently the last Buenos Aires Convention party not yet in Berne, became bound by the Berne Convention. Berne Article 5(2) provides that the enjoyment and exercise of copyright “shall not be subject to any formality.” The continued use of “All Rights Reserved” in IETF Trust notices appears to be a legacy artifact rather than a legally necessary reservation. Retaining obsolete legal language may create confusion about the scope of rights granted under IETF Trust terms and obscure the actual licensing framework.

Problem Statement The phrase “All Rights Reserved” continues to appear in IETF Trust copyright notices despite no longer being required for copyright protection under applicable international treaties. This raises the question of whether the phrase serves any current legal or operational purpose, or whether its continued use is unnecessary and potentially confusing.

Why It Is No Longer Necessary By August 23, 2000, every state listed by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) as a contracting party or signatory of the Buenos Aires Convention had become party to the Berne Convention. As a result, the Buenos Aires Convention notice formula no longer served any practical treaty function among those states, because Berne Article 5(2) prohibits conditioning the enjoyment or exercise of copyright on formalities.

List Of Buenos Aires Convention Parties And Berne Accession Date Country BAC Status Berne Accession Date Effective Argentina Apr 19 1950 Jun 10 1967 1967 Bolivia May 15 1914 Nov 4 1993 1993 Brazil Aug 31 1915 Feb 9 1922 1922 Chile Jun 14 1955 Jun 5 1970 1970 Costa Rica Nov 30 1916 Jun 10 1978 1978 Cuba * Feb 20 1997 1997 Dominican Republic Oct 31 1912 Dec 24 1997 1997 Ecuador Apr 27 1914 Oct 9 1991 1991 El Salvador * Feb 19 1994 1994 Guatemala Mar 28 1913 Jul 28 1997 1997 Haiti Nov 27 1919 Jan 11 1996 1996 Honduras Apr 27 1914 Jan 25 1990 1990 Mexico Apr 24 1964 Jun 11 1967 1967 Nicaragua Dec 15 1913 Aug 23 2000 2000 Panama Nov 25 1913 Jun 8 1996 1996 Paraguay Sep 20 1917 Jan 2 1992 1992 Peru Apr 30 1920 Aug 20 1988 1988 United States Jul 13 1914 Mar 1 1989 1989 Uruguay May 11 1919 Jul 10 1967 1967 Venezuela * Dec 30 1982 1982 * Signed only, no BAC in-force date shown by WIPO

What Is Not Being Proposed This document does not necessarily recommend that the IETF eliminate copyright notices altogether. A copyright notice can still serve useful evidentiary and administrative functions. It identifies the claimed copyright owner, records the year of publication, and helps document the rights claimed by the IETF Trust and, where applicable, by individual authors. In the United States, although copyright notice is no longer a condition of copyright protection for works published after the Berne Convention Implementation Act, a proper notice may still have consequences in infringement litigation. In particular, 17 U.S.C. § 401(d) limits a defendant’s ability to rely on innocent infringement to reduce statutory damages when the published work bears an appropriate copyright notice. The issue addressed by this document is therefore not whether copyright notices have any continuing value, but whether the specific phrase “All Rights Reserved” continues to serve any useful legal or operational purpose in IETF documents.

Security Considerations This document does not raise any security issues.